General Motors is gearing up for national sales of its new 2017 Volt, at the same time as it’s prepping for the release of the 2017 Bolt EV by the end of the year. The company’s marketing boss for both models, Darin Gesse, sheds some light on the plans.

Chevrolet Volt

Gesse said that the main goal is to target the right audience. Those specifically being people that are similar to current Volt owners. A few TV commercials have hit the national airwaves but Gesse admitted, “our customers don’t really watch TV.”

Instead, the focus will be online, in print publications, and on billboards. GM has found that most Volt buyers are hardcore enthusiasts that may trump the knowledge of dealership employees.

The primary information that will be reiterated about the Volt are the most notable and necessary facts:

53 miles of all-electric range

420 miles of total range

1,000 miles between fill-ups

In regards to the Bolt EV, similar emphasis will be placed on range, which rings in at 200 miles. Price of $30,000, after the rebates, will also be key. Since 70 percent of Volt owners are new Chevy customers, the company is looking at the Bolt EV similarly as a “halo car”.

Chevy has committed to only allowing dealers certified to sell EVs access to the vehicles. In order to provide the best customer transactions, the company is videotaping top salepeople and sharing this information with dealers. Gesse refers to the sale of an EV as “a discussion, not a sales process.” He goes on to explain that:

“These are not typical Chevy customers,” and that “The best way to explain the Volt is to experience it.”

Another avenue that Chevy is looking into is delivering vehicles directly to interested buyers’ homes, so that they can see it in their own driveway and are assured a test drive that is convenient for them. GM is also pushing dealerships to use Volts as loaners when possible.

The 2016 Malibu Hybrid is going on sale soon as well. It is a mid-size sedan with a Volt powertrain, but is NOT a plug-in. One of the primary aspects of the marketing plan is that Chevy will stress:

“Three great electrified products for three different use cases.”

Gesse made it clear that the official marketing process is still in the planning stages. Ideas are being pitched and considered, but nothing is yet set in stone.

Leave a Reply

What the title should say is How to save Government Motor and keep it alive after the Model 3. As I write this the reservation is approaching 200k. I am guessing 1 million by year end. This is 1 million cars that GM and others lost! And at the same time 42 BILLION in sales to Tesla!

You can’t compare Bolt to Model 3 this way. Model 3 has nationwide charging network, Bolt does not. If Chevy came out swinging to sell Bolt, they’d be talking about charging network, not “promotion”.

Even worse, as Gesse mentions, the potential customers are internet savvy and have done the research. Once they find out that Bolt will be “city car” while Model 3 will allow nationwide travel AND model 3 will be cheaper and quicker, well you get the picture.

At this time, even 30K cars Chevy planned seems way too many. They should just stick to making more, cheaper SparkEV to compete on bottom end. Tesla doesn’t have presence there, and I doubt even Tesla can compete against SparkEV any time soon.

If commuting is the reason for these cars, there are far cheaper alternatives. That’s why I say Chevy should expand SparkEV while coming up with better counter to Model 3. If they can get SparkEV pricing down to under $20K before subsidy (some dealers sell at this price now), that’d make for a nice cheap commuter EV. Then post subsidy is $12.5K, or $10K in CA or $8.5K for CA low income.

Meanwhile, Chevy can come up with better counter to Tesla. How about quicker 0-60 and AWD (like Subaru WRX)? How about DCFC in all their dealers (NOT FREE!)? How about partnering with McD or Vons to install DCFC at discounts or lease programs? They have lots of catching up to do, and lots of things they can do to quickly catch up.

The base Model 3 will have at least 200 miles range. That’s like three hours of driving. I don’t know about you, but I find driving for a few hours and then stopping for 30-45 minutes (for lunch or break) is a very pleasant way to road trip.

What, you’d prefer to drive for 8 hours straight wearing a diaper and not eating?

SparkEV said: “At this time, even 30K cars Chevy planned seems way too many.” Not at all. Not everyone is gonna wait 2-3 years to get a Model ≡. And you’re ignoring the reality that not everyone wants the same car. No matter how much the Model ≡ appeals to the mass market, there will still be some that won’t want it for one reason or another. Of that group, at least some will buy a Bolt. Tesla fans over-emphasize the importance of the Supercharger network. Sure, it’s a great selling point, but many EV drivers never charge their car away from home. For that market segment, the Supercharger network is irrelevant. Only 20-30k in sales per year is a pretty low bar for a long-range four-door plug-in EV like the Bolt. I think GM can easily meet that sales goal. In fact, I think they could easily sell 100k per year… if they actually wanted to, which they clearly don’t. If GM was really interested in selling the Bolt in large numbers, they would be building the EV powertrain in-house, instead of farming the entire thing out to LG Electronics. GM farmed that out for the same reason Toyota… Read more »

You’re looking at SC from actual charging point of view. Having supercharger available is what matters, whether you use it or not.

This is why it gives me confidence to drive out with SparkEV in CCS rich areas, even if I’m just going down the store. If something comes up (ie, must drive 100 miles to another store), I know I can deal with it by having CCS nearby.

Now scale this up, and this argument can be made with Bolt as well. Yes, you can drive 200 miles per charge, but confidence of knowing nationwide charger network of Model 3 will be far more valuable. In addition, model 3 cost less and quicker.

You argue your case well, and certainly to some extent you’re right: Even those Tesla Model S owners who have never used a Supercharger can drive with more confidence knowing the option is there if they ever plan to use it. Nonetheless, there will be many potential car buyers, even potential BEV buyers, for whom the existence of the Supercharger network won’t be a factor in the buying decision. Given the very few models of BEVs available, it shouldn’t take that big a market segment to add up to 30,000 per year. I find it very difficult to find any figures on the Internet for average annual sales by car model, but here’s a relevant citation: “Between 1985 and 1991, Nissan increased the its number of models to 60 from 39, but diluted its average sales per model to 22,364 from 26,771, according to Baring Securities.” source: http://www.nytimes.com/1992/08/30/business/a-lower-gear-for-japan-s-auto-makers.html So by that comparison, 30k annual sales for a car model is nothing to sneeze at. However, sales numbers for automobiles (and light trucks) are dominated by those models selling in very high numbers, well over 100,000 per year; up to 700,000+ per year. As an EV enthusiast, I look forward to… Read more »

Assuming there are no hiccups along the way for the ‘3’, and all the depositors actually purchase a vehicle, this you would think would greatly increase SC usage.

Since Tesla has stated the cost of the system isn’t material, yet warned the ‘locals’ from charging too much at them, I can only imagine the ongoing expense, and what the charge must be to discourage ‘3’ owners from actually using the SC unless they need to.

One thing that seems certain to be forgiven is that the SC will always be free 24/7/365. It could be if the ‘cost’ isn’t material – but – that statement sounds like it was a political statement.

There should be many times the “3” as the “S”, unless things change.

I think the BOLT will do just fine irrespective of the success of the “3”.

I couldn’t agree more on the last part of what you said. The average bolt price will most likely be $10,000 less than the average 3 price by early 2018 same for the leaf 2.0. Maybe not as much as that but even $5,000 is a lot of money when you start talking about $35k cars.

The cars that need to get much better in the next 2-3 years are the Audi’s, bmw’s, caddy’s, mercs, Lexus, etc.. Nissan and GM need to find ways to make their evs cheaper my next ev will be bought around 2018, I have a leaf now, it is my only car and it works just fine for me, if in 2018 I can buy a 30 kWh leaf that is limited to a 50 kW DCFC network but costs $25 Nissan will get my money. If a base Tesla 3 costs the same as the leaf it becomes a contest but I really can’t imagine that happening. At the top end of the Nissan and Chevy range their maybe a contest with BMW and tesla but really even the u r comparing top spec vs base model which isn’t really fair.

I think that’s why Musk was careful to say that SC capability will be standard – never said it was free, and never promised that it would be free for anyone except all current and future S and X vehicles.

I think that they will put a $2k point-of-sale option to enable SC on a Model 3, then charge at least that much, if not more, if it is activated later in the car’s existence. That will help moderate the SC usage.

As P-P noted, the SC network might not appeal to everyone the same way, and if it means getting their favorite options for less, then they might not opt for the SC activation. The next owner could, or they could do it if their lifestyle changes for whatever reason.

The Model 3 will be my only car, and I have family and friends in nearby states, so I will be opting into the SC network no matter the cost.

Haha! The model 3 is vaporware. All those people who reserved a model 3 have sold themselves on getting an EV and when they are watching their neighbors drivung their Bolts around while they languish in a waiting line, many of them will ask for a refund an d buy a Bolt. I can imagine an awesome marketing campaign by Chevy to get people waiting for a mythical EV to “get real”.

Being on the East Coast, and getting within about the first 120k reservations, and if the first delivery is actually by December 31st of 2017, then I know that I won’t be getting mine until at least the end of 2018, and that is with a good bit of luck.

No surprises or unrealistic expectations here. Nor will you find them, at least on this site, and not from almost all of us reservation holders. Very few people can afford to take $1k lightly, particularly with 2-3 years of inflation and no interest. We know what we are doing, and we know what each of us are willing to accept.

Did you see: ““These are not typical Chevy customers,” and that “The best way to explain the Volt is to experience it.”

How about having dealers keep their Volts plugged in so that test drives are not on the gas-engine only.

Dealers and sales people are basically only as good as the staff culture at the dealership. Some are just horrible and are “adult daycare” for people to hang around in during the day. Others have professional people working there offering good information and non-biased opinions. I don’t want to buy anything in Rio Rancho. I want to make a purchase of something I want. Coffee is for good EV salespeople.

I agree with this whole paragraph, they’re great ideas:
“Another avenue that Chevy is looking into is delivering vehicles directly to interested buyers’ homes, so that they can see it in their own driveway and are assured a test drive that is convenient for them. GM is also pushing dealerships to use Volts as loaners when possible.”

EC, the majority of car sales people may be failed employees from other industries. How many exited high school, went to car sales college, got a degree in professionalism and became well versed in the ideosyncracies of sales. Many are simply people who would get into a job on time every day. Not everyone will do that (see millions of SSI and disability recipients who actually don’t even need get out of bed to make a paycheck).

What I want is an “internet counter”, where I can walk in to a window and say “I want this, here’s my price, are we going to make this deal?” 30 seconds to a yes or no and done. Who needs sales people for that?

That is true, but for mass market adoption, today’s consumers still go into dealers. So you need those dealers educated on selling cars like the Volt and Bolt.

What you’re describing is a minority in the mass market today, I think. I agree it will continue to grow in importance to consider the aspects you bring up though.

That said, I think if Chevy truly wants the Volt and Bolt EV to be successful today, they’ll make sure traditional forms of advertising and selling are properly primed and ready to include these vehicles.

Sounds like they’re going only after their current customer profile, which doesn’t bode well for expanding customer base. Also, it doesn’t much matter how hard the corporate suits try unless it results in real change in the customers’ experience at the dealers. That will be the hard part. I predict that on the whole (there are always some exceptions) the dealers will be a big obstacle to Chevy’s EV sales.

“it doesn’t much matter how hard the corporate suits try unless it results in real change in the customers’ experience at the dealers.”

At this point, if there’s one thing GM should realize and focus on changing, it is this. If there’s two, it’s recognizing a Volt should be marketed like any other car. Stop the online marketing only nonsense.

At the risk of appearing to actually support the obsolete stealership dealership business model, which I don’t, it’s hardly a surprise that the vast majority of legacy auto dealers don’t promote plug-in EVs. When telling a customer why they should choose to buy a compelling EV, the salesman must tell them what’s wrong with all the gasmobile models the dealer sells.

And of course, there’s the problem (from the dealer’s viewpoint) that they won’t make as much off servicing a PEV as they do off servicing gasmobiles.

As I’ve said before, the best thing that GM could do (other than abandoning the dealership model entirely) is to create a new brand exclusively for EVs, and sell them only through those dealers. That way there wouldn’t be competition between gasmobiles and PEVs on the same sales lot.

You said: “That way there wouldn’t be competition between gasmobiles and PEVs on the same sales lot.”

The competition is already ubiquitous, thanks to the Internet and the ability for customers to play one dealer’s offer against another.

The only thing that’s new today is that “fuel type” has been added to the mix of customer considerations, which includes price, features, fit-to-needs, and “does the spouse like it, too?”

But, let’s say you really want to put plug-ins under a separate brand. Well, then, putting a PHEV with 13-mile AER into the EV brand would probably anger the PEV purists and be seen as a ploy to keep petroleum-powered options in front of the customers shopping the EV brand. I also don’t think it would be acceptable to deny a car like the Volt to a member of the EV branded stable, as studies have shown the Volt and Leaf accomplish nearly the same amount of EV miles per year.

I own a gen 1 Volt. I already put my Model 3 deposit down. Their ‘Internet savvy’ customers indeed see that GM is failing to implement fast charging at all and would rather give the money to a company.

Also, that all-glass roof on the Model 3 is incredible. Funny how the Bolt concept had it (and looked great!) and they got rid of it on the production model.

Also, no adaptive cruise control? When going up against a car with Autopilot?

Sure; just remove the front wheel and stick it in the back seat. Common sense says you’d be able to do that with a Model ≡ also. Since it’s a five-seater, there should be plenty of room in back for that.

If you don’t want a Model ≡, then of course you shouldn’t buy one. But don’t try to tell us it’s because the trunk won’t be big enough, then turn around and tell us a Camry or Accord would be fine. Obviously you dislike the Model ≡ for some other reason.

It’s a missed opportunity from Tesla, just like the Falcon doors. There are more than a couple people disappointed on TMC saying the same thing, including me (and Jalopnik ;-). They seem to value form over function and want that giant glass roof at all costs.

I’d have an order in for the X if it had more function and utility but those doors and non folding seats kill the deal for me. Sorry to say the 3 is shaping up the same. Sure would be nice for someone to make an all electric or plug-in CUV (with the Volt powertrain) that was 4wd and had at least a 30 mile range.

I’ve been waiting for four years so I can dump my SUV or pickup, guess it’ll be a few more years sigh.

Oh, I’m entirely on the same page as you regarding Tesla choosing style over practicality and functionality.

That’s why I say I’d much rather have a Model S than a Model X. The non-folding and non-removable seats in the MX actually gives the MS better cargo space, and would be a deal-killer for me if I actually could afford one.

And I don’t like the glass roof either; neither the half-roof of the MX or the full roof of the M≡. (No cars which double as solar ovens wanted here in the Great State of Kansas!) But at least we’ve been told the glass roof on the M≡ is an option, not standard equipment.

The Falcon doors are highly functional – Tesla was aiming at daily usage advantages, such as access to the 2nd and 3rd row seats, which the Falcon doors do best.

If you want to take your skis, then put them somewhere else other than the roof. That kind of functionality is the exception, not the rule.

Another excellent example is the windshield of the X. Being 6’4″, I have to slouch to see overhead traffic lights if I’m near the front of the line at many local intersections in a sedan. It is still sometimes necessary in my SUV, as well. That would not be a problem with the X. Visibility would be perfect for me. Problem is, I don’t have $80k lying around.

Tesla Motors does not do anything lightly, but I am disappointed with their choice of how the 2nd row seats do not fold down in any way. Fortunately, since I can’t afford it, I don’t have to worry about it.

I am also surprised at the trunk opening of the 3. Getting a Cd around 0.20 is impressive, but not at the expense of usefulness.

I’m a gen 1 volt owner too . The only reason I wll not buy the model 3 is the allglass roof. So I’ll stick with the Bolt .

Good small car to drive here in Quebec City and we get a lot of well located ccs charging station here when i want to travel away and more CCS in the way before the Bolt come and I’ll travel 200km to buy it from Bourgeois chevrolet because they deserve my businesses unlike all the other pathetique dealer here

GM has definitely put some thought into this, one reason why they are bringing cars to customer homes is so they can get a good look at it. When potential customers go to a Chevy dealership they are most often found scanning the ceiling as the salesmen drone on about all the short comings of EV’s and spout erroneous information about the Volt and Spark EV.

My favorite was when my neighbors picked up their Spark Ev from Chevy and were told that it didn’t come with a charger (EVSE) and had to be purchased separately ELSEWHERE.

There is absolutely no doubt that Volts and Bolts will vastly outsell the Model 3 this year and next. Let’s see what happens in 2018.

Although the websites make it difficult to find, GM seems satisfied with the response its gotten from its partnership with BOSCH.
d
They are mostly selling economically priced wallboxes (16 amps for volt, or ELR, 30 for the Bolt) – those Chinese things they have been selling for years, which I have used several times and they seem perfectly fine.

Lately – they have been labeled either “Cadillac” or “Chevy Volt”, and no doubt they’ll soon enough have one labeled ‘bolt’.

The 30 amps at almost 240 at home will provide essentially the fastest L2 charging speed for the BOLT, so BOSCH won’t have to change anything except superficially.

I haven’t gone through their ‘install process’, but it seems perfectly legal to me. Perhaps we could have a ‘slice of life’ article where someone who has used BOSCH as their ‘partner’ could say how easy the experience was.

The BOLT charger in the car is good for at least 32 amps, per their website. It also has a 7200 watt limitation.

A home having the most popular size wallbox in the states, a 30 amp model, will hit the power limitation at 240 volts, and so far at least, Bosch does not offer a higher current low-priced square model. If the cord is modified on the ‘cadillac cover’ model, and direct wired, this high-priced model supposedly will run at 32 amps, but, as shown, a 30 amp model for most people will hit the car’s power limitation anyway.

My home’s voltage on Aug 1st drops to 225 or less due to utility incompetance. I’d need a 32 amp or larger wallbox to get the full rate of charging into the BOLT. But probably most homeowners will get 100% full rated power with just a plain 30 amp wall box, as is shown in most of the Bolt Brouchures. I’m assuming in all this that the PF > .99 to meet Euro requirements, as has been standard practice with all car charger manufacturers.

The Bolt will work for me. I don’t need a Supercharger network nor do I need DC fast charging. I have driven farther than 160 miles exactly twice in the last two years, and both trips were college visits. Now if my daughter had chosen one of those schools, it would be a different story, but she stayed in state. And between my wife and me, I’ll always have a car that can travel that far just in case, most likely a Volt (I am on my second) or equivalent.

Promote? They need to promote their dealerships to actually support it. Do this by not making them buy tens of thousands of dollars in tools just to get the right to sell them.

They stated first year Bolt production to be 30,000 and that number is too small and has already caused people to “laugh” at GM for such a small number. However, how many of us are calling our Chevy dealers and asking “when can I order a Bolt??????” – if they don’t hear from people, they will think demand is low.

Dealers need to keep their sales people neutral biased on EV over ICE. Steering customers to an ICE if they don’t have an electric in-stock is not the proper way to grow the industry.

Agree, I am kicking myself in the a$$ for not getting in line for the model III. I was fully aware of of the implications, but submitted to she whom must be obayed. Still trying to justify my actions. The Bolt seems to be the only alternative, but it is so lame. Please GM, pick up your game.

I hate to be a troll , but all I can say is that 37500 for the Bolt seems over-priced compared to the Model 3. There are probably a pretty limited supply of people hat would choose the Bolt over the Tesla and be willing to pay nearly 10% more. I see mostly people who want to lease a Bolt until their Tesla is built

For the money, the 3 is going to have all of the autopilot safety features standard (presumably, the self-steering, lane changing and summon? features will be extra). That has to be at least close to a huge value at that price point. Not all automakers have all of those features in cars under $40k, AFAIK.

People are choosing the Model III over the Bolt by 10 to 1. Ouch. The Bolt will have to undercut the price to be competitive. The good news is Tesla will have used up their tax credits for new customers. That will give only a minor advantage to the Bolt.

GM will have a strong disincentive to promote compelling EVs, or sell them in large numbers, so long as their profit margin on plug-in EVs is significantly smaller than it is on their gasmobiles. This isn’t GM dragging its feet; this is GM maximizing profits.

GM also saves money by not training their salespeople about the Volt, I have to figure answers to questions by reading the poorly written and organized manual. Have several examples of this, e.g., electric parking brake and mode. Direct sales like Tesla would solve that problem. I can’t refer any customers to GM even though I really like my 2016 Volt.

They could start advertising by building out a fast charger network, you know, for that future car called the Bolt. I know, I know. GM doesn’t give a Rat’s Backside about Quick charging.
Do you think the smart suits at GM noticed the 200,000 orders for the model 3? Probably preoccupied with marketing the next monster Truck.

I’m not happy the Bolt doesn’t have ACC nor that GM isn’t building a charging network but it does have one trick up it’s sleeve…Commercial fleets, their half a billion investment into Lyft and also the car sharing service Maven…If you see a lot of Bolts on the road, they could be rented and not personally owned…Of course if gas jumps to $5/gal, things could change…

I like the Bolt, but here’s the problem: I can drive it from here to Tucson, and that’s it. There’s simply not enough charging infrastructure to make it anywhere else. You’d think the other automakers would form a consortium and get it done, but it’s so hodgepodge.

I suppose it’s possible that the MIII will be the first Tesla product ever delivered on its promised schedule. However, I doubt it.

Musk realizes that the promise of the MIII will likely be good enough to depress Bolt (and Gen2 Leaf) sales. So today, it’s December 2017; in 18 months, it’ll be summer 2018; in 24 months, it’ll be Q1 2019. (see: Model X)

The only thing Musk needs to worry about is delaying the MIII long enough for the Bolt to undergo a significant tech upgrade or price drop. Outside of that, the smart business move is to overpromise on delivery dates and keep the competition from moving EVs off their lots. He’s shown that he’s good at it.

I had a Volt for just over 5 years…..was # 313, an early adopter. I loved it, never had any serious problems with it…just a taillight lens fogged early on when washing the car, and some software had to be downloaded to fix a charging problem in year 4. I also hyper miled , and in 2014 bought only 9 gallons of gas.

At present I am driving a Tesla Model S 85. I love this car too. Had a electronic buzzing noise while accelerating, took it to the shop and they replaced the drive motor….no questions asked…so once again, great service on a car…..but the two cars are apples and oranges in comparison, just as the Bolt and Model 3 will be….I’m sure both cars will be fine autos for their respective owners.
I have a reservation on the model 3, but a Bolt would also work as a fine second car !